1
Notice
Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
2
Support - (fb2k) / Re: Foobar2000 v2.* playback sound quality lower than v1.X
Last post by Globares -A note: you can load both tracks into fb2k (either v1 or v2), select both, right click, Utilities > ABX tracks and you can do a ABX blind test to see if you can actually tell the difference between the two tracks. Please consider doing this and posting your ABX results!These samples are too close. Actually I downloaded the ABX utility to check if the "limiter" feature of it would help (it allows to play just a short piece and quickly switch between the samples), but no. I wonder if the author of the recordings can tell the difference listening on his own system. It doesn't mean that my original statement regarding the v1/v2 differences is false! I'm confident since the difference is too big for placebo effect.
3
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: foo_enhanced_spectrum_analyzer
Last post by TF3RDL -Killing all relevant details makes your plugin just a kid toy.While there is some merit for 1/3rd octave bands and 1/1st octave bands as well as the smoothing of the spectrum visualization (e.g. reducing the visual clutter) especially when you focused on the spectral trends instead, unnecessary smoothing do kill off some of the relevant details
4
Lossless / Other Codecs / Re: HALAC (High Availability Lossless Audio Compression)
Last post by Porcus -5
FLAC / Re: FLAC v1.4.x Performance Tests
Last post by Porcus -Is there any particular reason why 64-bit flac.exe should be so much faster than 32-bit?
6
Lossless / Other Codecs / Re: HALAC (High Availability Lossless Audio Compression)
Last post by Hakan Abbas -Could you release a new version with a "-high" argument which gets a bit higher compression ratio than default but 25-50% slower compression and decompression speed?
The graph above shows the change of compression ratio since the first version of HALAC. HALAC is a speed-oriented study and the last thing I want to compromise on speed is. The lossless compression rate of audio data is really limited in most cases.
SQUEEZE CHART is an archive that also contains different types of music used in audio compression tests. It gives an idea in a general sense. Since the first version, there has been an improvement of about 1% in the compression ratio at the same speeds (encode has been slightly faster). At extremely high speeds, this is really not bad. Depending on the current situation, it is a little difficult to predict how much further progress can be made.
HIGH mode has been requested from different people before. I will focus on the compression ratio in later versions. Because I've already mentioned that there is a little more space in this regard.
I started to get interested in the compression ratio with version 0.2.6. However, I had to enter the Player and DLL topic in accordance with the incoming requests. Now, as soon as I have time, I am trying to complete the new dynamic library I have developed for HALAC in a flexible and error-free way. Changes are also made to the file structure and working style in accordance with incoming requests.
7
3rd Party Plugins - (fb2k) / Re: foo_enhanced_spectrum_analyzer
Last post by mycroft -8
Listening Tests / Re: Personal blind sound quality comparison of xHE-AAC, Ogg Vorbis, and TSAC
Last post by Kamedo2 -ahaha, wow, TSAC-encoded files look painful to listen to!
Please note that TSAC used only 1/18th of the disk space of these competitors.
9
Listening Tests / Re: Personal blind sound quality comparison of xHE-AAC, Ogg Vorbis, and TSAC
Last post by Lampion -10
Listening Tests / Personal blind sound quality comparison of xHE-AAC, Ogg Vorbis, and TSAC
Last post by Kamedo2 -Personal blind sound quality comparison of xHE-AAC and Ogg Vorbis at around 134 kbps, and the Fabrice Bellard's new AI-based codec TSAC: Very Low Bitrate Audio Compression at 7.5kbps.
Encoders:
Except exhale v1.1.9, all of them are latest as of 7 May 2024.
xHE-AAC: exhale-V1.1.9-00423757_x64, exhale-v1.2.1_x64
Ogg Vorbis: aoTuV_b6.03_2020.
TSAC: Windows version (experimental): tsac-2024-04-08-win64.zip.
xHE-AAC commandlines:
exhale-V1.1.9-00423757_x64\exhale 5 in.wav out.mp4
exhale-v1.2.1_x64\exhale 5 in.wav out.mp4
ffmpeg109823 -c:a libfdk_aac -i out.mp4 -c:a pcm_f32le out.wav
Ogg Vorbis commandlines:
aoTuV_b6.03_2020\venc64 -q3.7 in.wav out.ogg
oggdecV1.10.1\oggdec -b 5 out.ogg --wavout out.wav
TSAC commandlines:
tsac-2024-04-08-win64\tsac -v -m tsac-2024-04-08-win64\dac_stereo_q8.bin -M tsac-2024-04-08-win64\tsac_stereo_q8.bin -q 12 c in.wav out.tsac
tsac-2024-04-08-win64\tsac -v -m tsac-2024-04-08-win64\dac_stereo_q8.bin -M tsac-2024-04-08-win64\tsac_stereo_q8.bin d out.tsac out.wav
Sample tracks:
15 sound samples from Kamedo2's samples(full download).
Total 15 diverse music sound samples, including highly critical samples.
Hardware:
Sony PSP-3000 + AKG K712.
Results (only traditional codecs, at around 134 kbps):
Results (including AI codec at 7.5kbps, it is not a bitrate-equalized comparison):
Conclusions & Observations:
- MPEG-4 xHE-AAC (eXtended High-Efficiency AAC), encoded by exhale (Ecodis eXtended High-efficiency And
Low-complexity Encoder), had very high fidelity at around 134kbps, with average score over 4.5. - Ogg Vorbis, encoded by aoyumi's aoTuV beta6.03(latest version as of 2024 May), also had very high fidelity at around 134kbps, with average score more than 4.4.
- It's not clear which encoder, xHE-AAC or Ogg Vorbis, was better, from this test alone. The difference was small.
- Both xHE-AAC and Ogg Vorbis at around 134kbps were better than the TSAC: Very Low Bitrate Audio Compression at 7.5kbps, at its maximum bitrate setting as of 2024-04-08 version. TSAC used 94.4% less disk space, and this test not meant to be a filesize-wise fair comparison.
Anova analysis:
Code: [Select]
FRIEDMAN version 1.24 (Jan 17, 2002) http://ff123.net/
Blocked ANOVA analysis
Number of listeners: 15
Critical significance: 0.05
Significance of data: 0.00E+000 (highly significant)
---------------------------------------------------------------
ANOVA Table for Randomized Block Designs Using Ratings
Source of Degrees Sum of Mean
variation of Freedom squares Square F p
Total 59 86.42
Testers (blocks) 14 1.00
Codecs eval'd 3 83.62 27.87 651.96 0.00E+000
Error 42 1.80 0.04
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fisher's protected LSD for ANOVA: 0.152
Means:
exh119 exh121 ogg128 tsac12
4.56 4.55 4.45 1.79
---------------------------- p-value Matrix ---------------------------
exh121 ogg128 tsac12
exh119 0.861 0.141 0.000*
exh121 0.193 0.000*
ogg128 0.000*
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
exh119 is better than tsac12
exh121 is better than tsac12
ogg128 is better than tsac12
Raw data:
Code: [Select]
exhale v1.1.9 exhale v1.2.1 aoTuV beta6.03 tsac-2024-04-08-win64
%feature 3 xHE-AAC xHE-AAC Ogg Vorbis TSAC: Very Low Bitrate Audio Compression
%feature 10 test tracks avg/albums avg test tracks avg/albums avg test tracks avg/albums avg test tracks avg/albums avg
%feature 11 138.7kbps/130.4kbps 139.0kbps/129.6kbps 143.2kbps/126.1kbps 7.4kbps/7.5kbps
%feature 12 exhale 5 in.wav out.mp4 exhale 5 in.wav out.mp4 venc64 -q3.7 in.wav out.ogg tsac -v -q 12 c in.wav out.tsac
5.000 4.500 4.400 2.300
4.400 4.500 5.000 1.700
5.000 5.000 4.300 1.900
4.800 4.600 4.400 1.900
4.400 4.600 4.800 1.800
4.500 4.600 4.700 1.500
4.600 4.700 4.300 2.100
4.700 4.500 4.600 1.700
4.500 4.400 4.700 1.700
4.100 4.300 4.400 1.600
4.400 4.500 4.200 1.500
4.700 4.500 4.300 1.800
4.500 4.700 4.300 1.700
4.500 4.400 4.200 1.900
4.300 4.400 4.100 1.800
%samples 41_30sec Perc.
%samples finalfantasy Strings
%samples ATrain Jazz
%samples BigYellow Pops
%samples FloorEssence Techno
%samples macabre Classic
%samples mybloodrusts Guitar
%samples Quizas Latin
%samples VelvetRealm Techno
%samples Amefuribana Pops
%samples Trust Gospel
%samples Waiting Rock
%samples Experiencia Latin
%samples Heart to Heart Pops
%samples Tom's Diner Acappella
Other tests:
- Personal blind comparison of the Bluetooth codec, AAC and SBC and LC3.
- Personal blind comparison of the Bluetooth codecs, AAC vs LC3, re-encoding
- Personal blind sound quality comparison of the Bluetooth codecs (AAC vs LC3)
- Personal blind sound quality comparison of Opus hard-CBR with framesize options
- Personal Blind Listening Test of the latest codecs at 40kbps, 48kHz
- Personal Blind Listening Test of Bluetooth codecs
- Personal Blind Listening Test of Opus and the exhale xHE-AAC encoder
- Personal Listening Test of AAC-LC and xHE-AAC at 96kbps and 128kbps
- Personal Listening Test of AAC and LAME encoders (old test, translated)
- Personal Listening Test of AAC, WMA, and MP3 encoders (old test, translated)
- Personal Listening Test of MP3 and Opus
- Personal Listening Test of AAC encoders available from FFmpeg
- Personal Listening Test of Experimental Modified Opus Encoders at 36, 48 kbps
- Personal Listening Test of 2 Opus encoders
- Personal Listening Test of LAME, iTunes and Helix MP3 encoders
- Personal Listening Test of MP3/Opus/AAC at 96kbps